Its ClickPad shares PNP ID "LEN2006" with the one in model E540 which is
already handled by the driver (both are Haswell iterations of the Edge
line, launched in 2014) but the dimensions it reports are different:
$ sudo ./touchpad-edge-detector /dev/input/event3
Touchpad SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad on /dev/input/event3
Move one finger around the touchpad to detect the actual edges
Kernel says: x [1472..5044], y [1408..3398]
Touchpad sends: x [1024..5045], y [2457..4832] /^C
Fortunately we can use the board ID, which is also different, to
distinguish among them.
$ dmesg | grep -i synaptics
psmouse serio1: synaptics: Touchpad model: 1, fw: 8.1, id: 0x1e2b1,
caps: 0xd001a3/0x940300/0x127c00, board id: 2691, fw id: 1494646
psmouse serio1: synaptics: serio: Synaptics pass-through port at
isa0060/serio1/input0
input: SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad as
/devices/platform/i8042/serio1/input/input4
Board ID in E540 is 2722:
psmouse serio1: synaptics: Touchpad model: 1, fw: 8.1, id: 0x1e2b1,
caps: 0xd001a3/0x940300/0x127c00, board id: 2722, fw id: 1484859
(from https://launchpadlibrarian.net/179702965/BootDmesg.txt)
Signed-off-by: Ramiro Morales <redacted>
---
drivers/input/mouse/synaptics.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Ramiro Morales [off-list ref] wrote:
Subject: [PATCH] Input: synaptics - quirk for Thinkpad E440
Its ClickPad shares PNP ID "LEN2006" with the one in model E540 which is
already handled by the driver (both are Haswell iterations of the Edge
line, launched in 2014) but the dimensions it reports are different:
Clarification: This patch is against the synaptics branch.
Regards,
--
Ramiro Morales
From: Benjamin Tissoires <hidden> Date: 2015-03-19 22:15:46
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Ramiro Morales [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Ramiro Morales [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Subject: [PATCH] Input: synaptics - quirk for Thinkpad E440
Its ClickPad shares PNP ID "LEN2006" with the one in model E540 which is
already handled by the driver (both are Haswell iterations of the Edge
line, launched in 2014) but the dimensions it reports are different:
Clarification: This patch is against the synaptics branch.
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?
Cheers,
Benjamin
Regards,
--
Ramiro Morales
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
[off-list ref] wrote:
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
[off-list ref] wrote:
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Actually the laptop manufacturing date is Nov '13, I bought it on May.
This patch is almost a year late because I had a false start
submitting fixes through the Ubuntu BTS[1] only to discover that a
clashing quirk for the E540 got added upstream about the same time.
The ability to include the board ID in the quirk table logic added by
this branch provides a way out.
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?
From: Benjamin Tissoires <hidden> Date: 2015-03-23 16:58:20
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Ramiro Morales [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Actually the laptop manufacturing date is Nov '13, I bought it on May.
This patch is almost a year late because I had a false start
submitting fixes through the Ubuntu BTS[1] only to discover that a
clashing quirk for the E540 got added upstream about the same time.
The ability to include the board ID in the quirk table logic added by
this branch provides a way out.
quoted
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:58:16PM -0400, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Ramiro Morales [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Benjamin Tissoires
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Then I am even more surprised that you need to quirk a late 2014
haswell refresh.
Actually the laptop manufacturing date is Nov '13, I bought it on May.
This patch is almost a year late because I had a false start
submitting fixes through the Ubuntu BTS[1] only to discover that a
clashing quirk for the E540 got added upstream about the same time.
The ability to include the board ID in the quirk table logic added by
this branch provides a way out.
quoted
Can you post your dmesg when booting the synaptics branch so that we
can check if the FW has the correct values stored or if we really need
to quirk it?